"Panasonic G series" Owners Thread

Reminds me of trips to the beach as a kid. One particular beach we'd visit was very stoney, and instead of sandcastles we'd build rock towers like this :)
 
Some more macro, 'tis the season!

One for perspective, to show how tiny some of these bugs really are. Here's a little black fly feeding on top of a Dandelion seed head:

Bug scale by K G, on Flickr

Some strange action going on here: Can't figure out whether it's a fly who has captured another fly who had captured a fly! Or if he's trying to save them from the spider web just visible under the leaf:

Fly captures fly, who captured fly by K G, on Flickr


And here's a little mite that's tricked me for a while, I see them here and there and always thought they were tiny Moths, nope, they're flies in disguise! Drain fly, Sink fly or Sewer fly they can be called apparently

Drain fly by K G, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Will do. I'm hoping it'll arrive tomorrow, but more likely Monday knowing the post over here.
 
I got it for a steal, on an already low priced lens, so even if I rarely used it but got the odd decent image, it'll be worth it :)
 
Cagey75 said:
I got it for a steal, on an already low priced lens, so even if I rarely used it but got the odd decent image, it'll be worth it :)
Click to expand...
Tell us more ,que !!
 
the black fox said:
Tell us more ,que !!
Click to expand...

AH, local-ish [hence why I have hopes of it arriving tomorrow, only bought it today] used but mint, the seller just wasn't using it really. He just recently bought the Pany 35-100 2.8 and sold a few primes, but he says the 60mm is sharper, he just needed an all in one. No secret sale or anything, sorry

There's one on ebay for £92 atm: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sigma-DN...326051&hash=item213feae4f9:g:Pz0AAOSw2q9a3jAn

Pretty much about what I paid
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
AH, local-ish [hence why I have hopes of it arriving tomorrow, only bought it today] used but mint, the seller just wasn't using it really. He just recently bought the Pany 35-100 2.8 and sold a few primes, but he says the 60mm is sharper, he just needed an all in one. No secret sale or anything, sorry

There's one on ebay for £92 atm: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Sigma-DN...326051&hash=item213feae4f9:g:Pz0AAOSw2q9a3jAn

Pretty much about what I paid
Click to expand...
I got mines on here for £60
A steal!
 
I keep hovering ,the one thing that holds me back is I have a 12-60 kit lens that came with the G80 so do I really need to duplicate 60mm ,so far in a month I have only used that lens once .a 100-300 would be more logical for my needs
 
It's going to double as a macro lens for me with the Raynox attachment. I was using the 100-300 this way but it's cumbersome to use one handed (I'm using off cam flash in the other) and it doesn't do any less than 1:1, I wanted something a little shorter. It will be sharper and should allow that little extra cropability when needed to match the zoom for 1:1. The combination gives 0.7x which is right in the middle of 1:2 and 1:1. I also had nothing at this focal length already, if you have 60mm covered I wouldn't bother. That would do the same job in decent lighting.

..........................................................................................................................................................................................


[edit] Late night going through pics and uploading

Some images from my first day with the Sigma 60mm 2.8, didn't get to use it a lot, but gave it a quick tester for macro, general walkabout and portrait [cats! what else are they good for?]

Alert Bug by K G, on Flickr

Time to go play by K G, on Flickr

P1100848 by K G, on Flickr


Orb snack by K G, on Flickr


It's got a nice 'Pop' to it, really did very little to these files [less than i would have for the 25 or the 100-300], I'll have to direct compare it to the 25 1.7 somehow at equal apertures, figure some way to do it fairly
 
Last edited:
Looks good to me Keith
 
BJP said:
That's a stunning photo Keith
Click to expand...


Thanks :) I can tell by cat pics usually if a lens is going to be good for portraits, and this one definitely will be. Took a couple of the kids too, but nothing properly set up just more snap shots.
 
Quick-fire test done today between the 60mm and my Pany 25 1.7 - I won't bother posting many results, as it was very boring, just trees, leaves, random objects - but the 60mm is indeed sharper. And I only ever shoot in manual mode, so the 25mm was at it's best. Only tested them against one another at 2.8, ISO 200 on a decent enough day for lighting. Different lenses for different purposes, it was only for my own curiosity, but someone might be interested.

I didn't spend much time trying to get the perfectly identical framing for both, and the 25mm does focus in closer, so this may look odd that the 25 looks more 'zoomed' in, but like I say it was a casual test, hand held, and I got them near enough

6025compare1.jpg
 
Cagey75 said:
Quick-fire test done today between the 60mm and my Pany 25 1.7 - I won't bother posting many results, as it was very boring, just trees, leaves, random objects - but the 60mm is indeed sharper. And I only ever shoot in manual mode, so the 25mm was at it's best. Only tested them against one another at 2.8, ISO 200 on a decent enough day for lighting. Different lenses for different purposes, it was only for my own curiosity, but someone might be interested.

I didn't spend much time trying to get the perfectly identical framing for both, and the 25mm does focus in closer, so this may look odd that the 25 looks more 'zoomed' in, but like I say it was a casual test, hand held, and I got them near enough

View attachment 127222
Click to expand...

I was thinking about this lens for close/semi macro, at the moment ime using an old Nikon fit Sigma 105 macro via dumb adapter with a Meik flash on the camera, the flash will clear the lens but wonder if it would clear the 60mm and raynox, this is how well the flash covers at the moment.

First attempts for a few years, will be interested in how you get on.

P5260013 by electric.mike, on Flickr

P5260008 by electric.mike, on Flickr
 
Some great images from the 100-300 and 100-400 in this thread makes me tempted to by a longer lens. Would love the 100-400 but out of my budget.
 
Although it’s a great lens I sometimes wonder if the extra bit of reach is worth what I paid for it ,I tried both before buying ,and there really wasn’t much difference in I.q to be honest .for the extra grand.
 
mikew said:
I was thinking about this lens for close/semi macro, at the moment ime using an old Nikon fit Sigma 105 macro via dumb adapter with a Meik flash on the camera, the flash will clear the lens but wonder if it would clear the 60mm and raynox, this is how well the flash covers at the moment.

First attempts for a few years, will be interested in how you get on.

P5260013 by electric.mike, on Flickr

P5260008 by electric.mike, on Flickr
Click to expand...


Your current macro lens will be better than the 60mm + Raynox, when doing macro with any set up I manual focus only, so the AF isn't important. To match a true macro lens I would need to add on a Raynox 150, which is pretty cheap, and get a step up ring to stack them. Atm, the 250 on the 60mm gives me about 0.71x so there's a bit of cropping needed say for bugs, but it's great for plants/flowers larger subjects, butterflies if I could find any!

As for flash, it would easily clear the 60 + Raynox, the lens is short, it's about the same size as my 25mm, and the Raynox [which I screw on using a 46mm to 43mm step down ring] doesn't add much length to it. The combination will be a fair bit shorter than your adapter and 105mm
 
Cagey75 said:
Your current macro lens will be better than the 60mm + Raynox, when doing macro with any set up I manual focus only, so the AF isn't important. To match a true macro lens I would need to add on a Raynox 150, which is pretty cheap, and get a step up ring to stack them. Atm, the 250 on the 60mm gives me about 0.71x so there's a bit of cropping needed say for bugs, but it's great for plants/flowers larger subjects, butterflies if I could find any!

As for flash, it would easily clear the 60 + Raynox, the lens is short, it's about the same size as my 25mm, and the Raynox [which I screw on using a 46mm to 43mm step down ring] doesn't add much length to it. The combination will be a fair bit shorter than your adapter and 105mm
Click to expand...

Maybe shouldn't say on this thread ;) but i haver ordered the 60mm Olympus macro, as i didnt already have a raynox that and the sigma would have been approaching the Olympus cost with cash back.

Well thats my excuse:D
 
mikew said:
Maybe shouldn't say on this thread ;) but i haver ordered the 60mm Olympus macro, as i didnt already have a raynox that and the sigma would have been approaching the Olympus cost with cash back.

Well thats my excuse:D
Click to expand...


Nice one :) That's what I initially wanted, but got the Raynox cheap enough on here a few months back to mess about with, and got the Sigma cheap recently so all good. The Oly 60mm will be more flexible, you can get good close up to macro to general shooting instantly [though you might have to hit the switch on side] for now I have to screw the Raynox on so can't just whip it off to shoot normal view, but will be getting a step up ring to allow it to clip on and off. I can do this on the 100-300 as it's just at the maz filter thread size for the clip.

If you're ever selling that old Sigma 105 and adapter let us know.

Speaking of the Raynox + 60mm, here's a few from last couple of days

Buttercup by K G, on Flickr

Waiting to strike by K G, on Flickr

P1100993 by K G, on Flickr


Puss Moth [maybe?] by K G, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
and another from today ,I had difficulty on getting a a/f lock on this so for the first time I used manual focus ,wow didn't realise it did P.I.P and gave such precise focus ,well pleased with the results with this in manual .probably normal to the macro lads but part of the learning curve for me
gently does it by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
 
the black fox said:
and another from today ,I had difficulty on getting a a/f lock on this so for the first time I used manual focus ,wow didn't realise it did P.I.P and gave such precise focus ,well pleased with the results with this in manual .probably normal to the macro lads but part of the learning curve for me
gently does it by jeff and jan cohen, on Flickr
Click to expand...


I never use AF for close up/macro, it's too unreliable, a slight breeze can throw focus off. Instead I switch to MF, and move my body physically forward and back to focus, it gets much easier with practice like anything else. Very nice spider shot, an orb weaver afaik
 
Yup, the magnified view is great for manual focusing and as long as you have the time to focus manually you can get very precise results :D

I have an old film era Sigma 50mm f2.8 1:1 macro I use for flower shots and the like :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top